On Apr 4, 2007, at 8:36 AM, Alain Matthes wrote:
Le 4 avr. 07 à 14:04, Charilaos Skiadas a écrit :
Ok, the question remains though. The script is already complicated enough
yes but with two scripts, the problems would be divided; more users of mac in general works with pdflatex, and the script for pdflatex is simplest. I prefer two scripts like "dvi" and "pdf" and there is no ambiguity and no test and it's more simple for you !
Hm, that is a possibility. But are there many users who would like to be previewing their files in dvi? And what are the dvi previewers available on Intel machines?
and I wouldn't want to add a whole new option about distillers until I know there is enough need for that. You can of course just change the corresponding word in the file to the distiller you use,. Or do you often switch between the various distillers? I'll plan to add support for this, along with the option to preview the ps file instead of converting it to pdf, in the Ruby version of the script, but this won't come out for a couple of months probably. So is the ability to switch between distillers really critical? If so, I can see about changing the shell script, but I try to avoid doing that as much as possible.
No it's not for me!
I hate dvi + ps !! pdflatex it's very fine for me with Tikz/pgf ( no pstricks)
Ok now I am confused. What are the various compilation paths that you would like to see?
1) pdflatex 2) latex + dvips + ps2pdf 3) .... ?
Or is this not what you are asking?
But if the new script is a Ruby version, i need to learn Ruby... :)
I find that easier than learning Bash ;)
Alain Matthes
Haris Skiadas Department of Mathematics and Computer Science Hanover College